Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

About That Global Warming...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
    Screw wildlife until it can get a job like everyone else.
    If the alternative is "Save a whale, kill a baby", yes.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Originally posted by Commodore View Post

      If the alternative is "Save a whale, kill a baby", yes.

      When has that ever been a choice?
      Seriously, what the fuck are you on about as that's possibly one of the most odd comments I've ever seen.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
        When has that ever been a choice?
        Seriously, what the fuck are you on about as that's possibly one of the most odd comments I've ever seen.
        Did you miss the discussion above about population control?

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • No but when has the problem you talked about ever happened?
          Humans can't breed like rabbits forever is hardly a controversial statement and saying we can live without giving wildlife space is insane.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
            No but when has the problem you talked about ever happened?
            Humans can't breed like rabbits forever is hardly a controversial statement and saying we can live without giving wildlife space is insane.
            Population control, and dramatic population reductions, is the dream of the environmentalist community. They just try to keep quiet about it because it would expose them as the loons that they are, and most of the civilized world is already committing demographic suicide as it is. Once that collapse is complete, the third world, that already can't support itself, won't be far behind.

            The vast majority of wildlife would quite comfortably coexist among pastured livestock. It's the industrial monocultures, that in turn support the feedlots, that are causing habitat destruction.
            Last edited by Commodore; 04-03-2015, 06:41 PM.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
              No but when has the problem you talked about ever happened?
              Humans can't breed like rabbits forever is hardly a controversial statement and saying we can live without giving wildlife space is insane.
              Apparently for some -those who believe in "grow or die"- human population reaching stability cannot be done. Therefore, we must breed like rabbits. As if we have as little capacity to plan and control our behavior as rabbits. Stay tuned...

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Originally posted by Commodore View Post

                Population control, and dramatic population reductions, is the dream of the environmentalist community. They just try to keep quiet about it because it would expose them as the loons that they are, and most of the civilized world is already committing demographic suicide as it is. Once that collapse is complete, the third world, that already can't support itself, won't be far behind.

                The vast majority of wildlife would quite comfortably coexist among pastured livestock. It's the industrial monocultures, that in turn support the feedlots, that are causing habitat destruction.
                That comment about the "whale or baby" is interesting. Most of our oxygen is cycled thru the oceans' biology, specifically involving marine plant life.
                ...most (70%) of the oxygen in the atmosphere is produced by marine plants.

                http://education.nationalgeographic....freely/?ar_a=1

                Perhaps when one kills too many whales (which process tons of marine plant life every day), one can successfully kill an untold number of human babies (via suffocation) as well. Keep up that mistrust of environmental science, at our babies' peril.

                The reason pop control is dismissed is based on the "grow or die" hypothesis in economics. Fewer (or stable number of) consumers present a dilemma if a nation is to prosper based on increasing consumption. Consider the possibility that ever increasing consumption is not the only option for a species to survive. Middle class families in developed countries tend to reproduce at low numbers -sometimes so low that their numbers begin to decline. They follow this strategy because resources needed for their children to prosper are limited. Not because they are dreamy-eyed, environmentalist dirt worshippers. Hydroponics fixes the food problem of "grow or die" strategists. It does nothing to answer the problems with limited resources in education, environmental stability, economic opportunities or other requirements for one generation to provide for the next.

                That is the elephant in the room, which most on both the left and right ignore.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  That comment about the "whale or baby" is interesting. Most of our oxygen is cycled thru the oceans' biology, specifically involving marine plant life.
                  [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
                  http://education.nationalgeographic....freely/?ar_a=1

                  Perhaps when one kills too many whales (which process tons of marine plant life every day), one can successfully kill an untold number of human babies (via suffocation) as well. Keep up that mistrust of environmental science, at our babies' peril.
                  Wouldn't eliminating whales increase the amount of marine plant life performing photosynthesis, thus increasing the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere. That's whats happened before. So, our children might be ever so slightly more likely to hyperventilate, or spontaneously combust, but probably not suffocate.
                  Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  The reason pop control is dismissed is based on the "grow or die" hypothesis in economics. Fewer (or stable number of) consumers present a dilemma if a nation is to prosper based on increasing consumption. Consider the possibility that ever increasing consumption is not the only option for a species to survive. Middle class families in developed countries tend to reproduce at low numbers -sometimes so low that their numbers begin to decline. They follow this strategy because resources needed for their children to prosper are limited. Not because they are dreamy-eyed, environmentalist dirt worshippers. Hydroponics fixes the food problem of "grow or die" strategists. It does nothing to answer the problems with limited resources in education, environmental stability, economic opportunities or other requirements for one generation to provide for the next.

                  That is the elephant in the room, which most on both the left and right ignore.
                  Families in the developed world have ceased having children because the culture has rejected the concept of motherhood, particularly stay at home motherhood as somehow demeaning to women. While no one could blame someone for finding the Stepford Wife role mundane, with little to do in the suburbs but light maintenance and just enough technology to make such chores seem trivial, the raising the next generation is still the most important job on Earth. For all the prior millennia, women have had very productive, creative, and essential things to do in the home. Two income homes that have taken over since have not only failed to substantially improve the economic well being of the family, but have monopolized valuable time and increased the costs (ie consumption) to the family in the form of child care, transportation, and other things that where handled in house before, have over saturated the labor market, and made it far more difficult to raise the children that survive to be born. They are instead raised by the television, the state, or the street, resulting in a great deal of expensive social problems. There is no shortage of resources, just a lack, or an outright loss, of ideas of how to use them.

                  Aquaponic systems do far more than just provide food, they put productivity back in the home. Without the need for the money to buy needed things that can be produced agriculturally, it becomes far more economically viable for one spouse to be in the home, most likely the mother. Which begins to unravel the host of other cultural, economic, and consumption problems we have brought upon ourselves.
                  Last edited by Commodore; 04-04-2015, 01:11 AM.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • I will say this------------> how is your life going? (besides economically) Are we living longer? Better medicine? More entertainment options? What is the food situation? And yet, and yet, the left is whining about some contrived problem.

                    Do you notice, that the one thing that at least some people might complain about, (economics) the left doesn't want to talk about, they would rather talk about this; and why we have to screw ourselves economically, so they can save what?

                    Will Americans never figure out this is a contrived excuse why things stink; which is exactly why the left constantly tries to keep it on the front burner! We went from horses, to trains, to autos, to planes; all the while human longevity grew. Now they are trying to tell you that you are suppose to pause for the cause, pay more for less, and somehow this is going to help you, lol.

                    Somewhere in humans future, a crisis will arise that we can't solve. It may be 500 years, 1000 years, or maybe a million years. But I promise you that if whatever the crisis is that puts human existence at risk, countries that continue on doing what causes our problem will not be taxed as a solution, while allowing other humans in other countries to carry on threatening human existence.

                    Who can even believe this leftist fairytale that the world would do this? I mean seriously. And also, who believes that with all the volcanoes, all of the earthquakes, all of everything that has happened to this planet since its birth, that it will just die because you drive a car, and if you stop driving it somewhere down the road, the planet won't heal.

                    Who are they trying to kid, and if you really believe this, then you need to move into a cave. Yep, everyone is living longer, eating better, living more comfortably, are warmer when it is cold, cooler when hot, but you are all in deep doo-doo. Nothing has happened that they said would, but you gotta believe them, especially when they have been caught multiple times messing with the data that proves (disproves) their case.

                    Ridiculous! How they can keep a straight face while putting forth this garbageski is something for future shrinks to debate. For me, I just roll my eyes and laugh.
                    Last edited by Imawhosure; 04-04-2015, 11:01 AM.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Flashback 1971: Scientists Predict Burning Coal Will Cause The Next Ice Age

                      The world is on the verge of another ice age. Well, at least that’s what scientists told us in the 1970s: burning fossil fuels like coal would cause the world to plunge into another ice age in the 21st Century.
                      “The world could be as little as 50 or 60 years away from a disastrous new ice age, a leading atmospheric scientist predicts,” the Washington Post reported on July 9, 1971, quoting Dr. S. I. Rasool of NASA and Columbia University.


                      http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/03/fl...-next-ice-age/

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • Originally posted by Commodore View Post
                        Wouldn't eliminating whales increase the amount of marine plant life performing photosynthesis, thus increasing the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere. That's whats happened before. So, our children might be ever so slightly more likely to hyperventilate, or spontaneously combust, but probably not suffocate.

                        Families in the developed world have ceased having children because the culture has rejected the concept of motherhood, particularly stay at home motherhood as somehow demeaning to women. While no one could blame someone for finding the Stepford Wife role mundane, with little to do in the suburbs but light maintenance and just enough technology to make such chores seem trivial, the raising the next generation is still the most important job on Earth. For all the prior millennia, women have had very productive, creative, and essential things to do in the home. Two income homes that have taken over since have not only failed to substantially improve the economic well being of the family, but have monopolized valuable time and increased the costs (ie consumption) to the family in the form of child care, transportation, and other things that where handled in house before, have over saturated the labor market, and made it far more difficult to raise the children that survive to be born. They are instead raised by the television, the state, or the street, resulting in a great deal of expensive social problems. There is no shortage of resources, just a lack, or an outright loss, of ideas of how to use them.

                        Aquaponic systems do far more than just provide food, they put productivity back in the home. Without the need for the money to buy needed things that can be produced agriculturally, it becomes far more economically viable for one spouse to be in the home, most likely the mother. Which begins to unravel the host of other cultural, economic, and consumption problems we have brought upon ourselves.
                        Sure, plant life doesn't need critters to eat it in order to achieve biological stability. Look at how deer populations grow in such healthy fashion when they are not subject to predators. All jokes aside, that isn't biology, it's wishful thinking.

                        There is no widespread disdain of motherhood, especially within a stable family structure. Anecdotal examples of ignorant comments from a small minority of feminists, included in the slightly larger group of misanthropes, won't prove your point. Most people -childless or not- support motherhood, but not single parent motherhood. See link:
                        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021607306.html

                        For millennia, women took the little ones out to either gather food or process it in the farmstead. They worked part-time with the children, which doubled as the education they needed to become hunter/gatherers or farmers themselves. Dad being the only breadwinner in an urban setting isn't anywhere close to being something we've done "for millennia". To claim one hundred years would be a stretch. If you want to make the argument for part-time work (France) vs. full time (US) when one is a parent with a partner, there are points to be made. But to claim that the single-breadwinner strategy could be sustained, requires limiting the supply of labor. Each full-time working parent must demand income increases that would keep up with inflation in those things that the stay-at-home parent could not provide. Those points would be harder to make; neither parent can provide all food (aquaponic systems need to be tested first to see what limitations they have). Home schooling can be done up to a certain grade level, then it can cost a lot more money at an institution. One parent can drive, but can the other afford to buy one vehicle (assuming they don't need two)? The cost of the home and its' maintenance? If employers can't continue to heavily subsidize health care (that was the trend) and the gov't. is out of the question, the single-breadwinner will be way over his head trying to handle those costs.

                        It is worth moving in that direction (one part-time parent/French strategy), but I see current requirements for education, housing and health care as restricting population growth. Mom or dad will need to move from part time to full time when the kids get to college age, they will need to save more for health care and retirement in old age, and they will need to keep up with the house expenses. That tells me they will still plan for fewer than 3 children as a rule. Unless you're thinking massive gov't. subsidies for having more children? Just kidding. Perhaps the business sector will cough up the lion's share of productivity gains to pay all cost increases (more kids & inflation on essentials)? Just kidding, again.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • And so given these other more major problems facing humanity going into the future, a little global warming due to higher levels of c02, a gas of life, is not so important as to be taking up so much time, with nefarious plans to redistribute world wealth by taxation driving its importance.

                          We are actually, according to the science undergoing the 6th mass extinction, but unlike the other 5 caused by changes in the earth itself by natural causes, or getting rocked by a space rock hitting us, this one is entirely human caused. Our actions upon this planet that is fueling a cancerous form of capitalism, is literally turning the earth into an environment that will not support us at some point in time. Yet this gets no time in the news, no UN groups meeting about it, talking about it, perhaps because they are not as easily used to redistribute the wealth of others, which of course doesn't include most of the members of the UN who are all people coming from the elite sector.

                          In fact, this politically driven AGW crapola, is making it impossible to address the real clear and present danger that our current path as a species is leading us gleefully into, and it's horrible inevitable conclusion. Instead of being good stewards of this garden in which we live, instead of maintaining it, doing as little harm as possible as we tread upon it for our very substanence and life, we are treating like it isn't finite, that it too has its own nature that it must follow, as it interacts with the rest of nature.

                          And yet today, like never before in the history of mankind, we have the intelligence, we have the technology, we have the ability to change the very ways that we live upon this earth. We have the ability to get rid of hunger, completely. We are on the cusp of being able for all people to have an energy source that is not fossil based, and is clean, not adverse to the garden, and energy is needed in order to people to prosper, to thrive as a human being. To live in an environment in which daily life is thriving, not suffering from a lack of resources, that destroys the body of the person. We have the intelligence and the technological ability to actually have a great golden age, the highest golden age ever experienced by the human being. And this is possible by not continuing on with the 6th Great Extinction of life, and without literally making the earth slowly uninhabitable for the human species. To thrive as a species in a sustainable way, and to live in a veritable Garden.

                          I see us as being actually forced into this, with mother being the necessity of invention, and as also another evolutionary event for the human species. It is what happens when intelligence develops to a particular level, and I think the catalyst for this will probably follow an implosion of the current paradigm as being a total failure to continue to meet the reality that the modern world moves into. What we are currently doing, this way of doing it, is just not possible to keep. It served its purpose, and it did it as well as could ever be expected, but we will be forced to evolve out of it.

                          Capitalism is doomed. It is inevitable, unless we destroy ourselves first with nukes or some other tool of extinction. For Capitalism has to have infinite growth. That is its very fabric. But infinite growth set up aside FINITE RESOURCES, cannot exist together. And that is pure logic, rationality, that the lovers of Capitalism just simply refuse to accept as fact, which it is, and its a hard fact. It is reality. So, we cannot have infinite growth, or cancer shows us that it kills its host. And that is what iinfinite growth is, when the fact of reality is that we have finite resources on which this beast is feeding, which allows it to live, and the people that use it.

                          So intelligence will lead us onto a new path. We have to have economies, that are sustainable, for economies is the means to feed populations, and supply the needed essential for life itself. So intelligence says we have to have widgets, that are not disposable, as our cell phones are. A new one comes out each week, and some throw the old ones away, so they can have the newest, with an additional function, and so on. So our earth friendly economy makes widgets, engineers them, to be updated, and engineered to NOT wear out in a year, or whatever is currently designed into almost all consumer widgets. That is, we value and use a few resources as we can get away with, while recycling everything.

                          But we will have to use this attitude with all things that economies provide. We will have to be more localized, with most areas growing their own food, and scientifically, and in a way that keeps the earth a garden and not a whore to be used up and discarded. For we cannot discard what sustains not only our life, but all life. It is estimated currently that within a certain amount of time, given current fishing, we will have basically practically fished out the oceans. Hard to imagine, but certainly within the realm of common sense possibility. And what are we doing today, that will really keep this from happening? It will certainly happen, unless we change the way we are doing things. Yet the UN is not concerned about this, or they don't turn it into something like AGW, which is our least worry!


                          And that is what really pisses me off personally about these hysterical alarmists, who don't seem to care that their demand to have the newest widget as they discard their old one is using up finite resources, which the future people will eventually not have, yet they will devote so much time to something like c02 levels and their fervor to redistribute income from not the elites, but the average human, to others, with plenty of middle men to dip their beak in these vast fortunes, which will hardly ever benefit the little poor people they are so set on helping out. It's just absurd insanity, and it really does piss me off. One gets a feeling of being surrounded by complete and utter idiots, who see the world, and the universe through these little tubes that creates a myopic vision driven by either laziness or just utter ignorance created by a conscious decision to just ignore what tears a huge rip in vested ideological beliefs. The c02 alarmists are smack in the middle of this group of people. As are the people who have fooled themselves into actually believing Capitalism is sustainable when the facts reveal otherwise.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                            ....
                            But we will have to use this attitude with all things that economies provide. We will have to be more localized, with most areas growing their own food, and scientifically, and in a way that keeps the earth a garden and not a whore to be used up and discarded. For we cannot discard what sustains not only our life, but all life. It is estimated currently that within a certain amount of time, given current fishing, we will have basically practically fished out the oceans. Hard to imagine, but certainly within the realm of common sense possibility. And what are we doing today, that will really keep this from happening? It will certainly happen, unless we change the way we are doing things. Yet the UN is not concerned about this, or they don't turn it into something like AGW, which is our least worry!


                            And that is what really pisses me off personally about these hysterical alarmists, who don't seem to care that their demand to have the newest widget as they discard their old one is using up finite resources, which the future people will eventually not have, yet they will devote so much time to something like c02 levels and their fervor to redistribute income from not the elites, but the average human, to others, with plenty of middle men to dip their beak in these vast fortunes, which will hardly ever benefit the little poor people they are so set on helping out. It's just absurd insanity, and it really does piss me off. One gets a feeling of being surrounded by complete and utter idiots, who see the world, and the universe through these little tubes that creates a myopic vision driven by either laziness or just utter ignorance created by a conscious decision to just ignore what tears a huge rip in vested ideological beliefs. The c02 alarmists are smack in the middle of this group of people. As are the people who have fooled themselves into actually believing Capitalism is sustainable when the facts reveal otherwise.
                            The "little tubes" you mention are what is called the "silo effect", described in various disciplines. Here's one from business (capitalism), that is as accurate as the other disciplines:
                            [QUOTE]The Silo Effect in business refers to the lack of communication and cross-departmental support often found in large companies. Teams work only on their own goals, often ignoring the needs of others, and information (and customers) get lost in the middle.
                            http://www.passionforbusiness.com/ar...ilo-effect.htm

                            Capitalism is sustainable, so I'd say you are stuck in a silo that claims otherwise. Most people will usually try to sell high & buy low, which you apparently fail to admit. However, "endless growth" capitalists are trapped in their own silo, because they cannot perceive other versions of capitalist behavior. Let's take your vision of a future economy (last paragraph) for example. Recycling isn't going to be done -initially- without a profit motive at the processing & re-marketing level. That is, those who risk the startup and cultivate demand for their products (semi-processed, recycled materials) will want to make a good living at it. They will want a profit, not just for themselves but also for the company, which they will want to expand. In a sustainable economy, they will realize they are limited in how big they can become, imposed by both their customer and supply base. At that point (market saturation), they could set up a non-profit company that shifts from profits to efficiency and stability as the goal. Having loaded their own accounts and developed an attachment to their company, the new goal of efficiency and stability changes their strategy. They set up a management/worker cooperative, to split revenue. Rather than using extra money to expand the company, they split the difference: part of that extra goes to bonuses -because pay raises can't be sustained if population and other economic factors remain flat in the long run. The other portion goes to making the company more efficient, which assures a longer lived business. In this case, it evolved into a non-profit (non-capitalist) business.

                            Capitalism will survive, only it won't look like today's capitalism. The capitalist phase will be short-lived to reward the initial risk-takers, then evolve into a non-profit business that survives based on relevance and long term efficiency. Since inflation and population (demand) remain flat or decline, a permanent & widespread economy based on capitalism would no longer make sense. At that point, increasing resources (due to flat/declining population) allow sporadic or temporary bursts of capitalism to introduce better adapted products & services to the consumer. Once growth of that product has finished, it converts to non-profit status, which can expand or contract based strictly upon demand rather than shareholder profit or other growth requirements. The bonus wage could be used by the average worker to buy the more expensive widget that you mention -the more valuable one that is designed for long term use. As opposed to the defective widget -with designed obsolescence- sold by today's "Bigger/Better" capitalists.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • Does this sound anything like that "consensus" on global warming?

                              For years, the federal government has advised Americans that they are eating too much salt, and that this excess contributes yearly to the deaths of tens of thousands of people.
                              But unknown to many shoppers urged to buy foods that are “low sodium” and “low salt,” this longstanding warning has come under assault by scientists who say that typical American salt consumption is without risk.
                              Moreover, according to studies published in recent years by pillars of the medical community, the low levels of salt recommended by the government might actually be dangerous.

                              http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/06/more-scientists-doubt-salt-is-as-bad-for-you-as-the-government-says/

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                                Does this sound anything like that "consensus" on global warming?

                                [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]Moreover, according to studies published in recent years by pillars of the medical community, the low levels of salt recommended by the government might actually be dangerous.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]

                                http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/06/more-scientists-doubt-salt-is-as-bad-for-you-as-the-government-says/
                                It is the same thing with butter and meat. Have any of you read the update on that one? How long has that been going on now, 50 years; only to discover the data was cooked. Sound familiar?!?!

                                No offense to anyones point of view, but you know, these people have been telling you for YEARS all this stuff is bad for you, and yet we live longer, and life gets better. And now we find that in many of these studies about saturated fat, salt, and a host of other things, the books were cooked. They were cooked because certain people had an agenda, and they knew better than the rest of America.

                                Now we have MMGW alarmists who have been caught red handed cooking the books several times. Yet, you won't listen, or don't care. If the evidence is sooooo compelling and obvious, why do they have to cook the books?

                                I understand that some of you are young and have been indoctrinated into this since you attended school; but the truth is if there really is a group of people who are flat earthers, it is you! You don't have to accept opposing views or facts, all you need to be aware of is that they cooked the books to get you to buy in. In other words, THEY LIED! Without the lies, there is no crisis at all; kind of like there was no problem with eating meat and butter.

                                And finally......................how many people do you know that are reasonably educated, that do not have a political opinion? How many people do you know that are reasonably educated that do not want to make money; more money than necessary to just sustain themselves?

                                Then how can anyone with a straight face, say that these scientists would never have a political agenda, nor are they doing it to get grants of millions of dollars to sustain themselves comfortably, when you have already had it proven to you, that they cooked the books?!?!?!?!

                                To me, that is acting like a bunch of sheep who are willing to follow a sheep dog, no matter how smart, or dumb, that dog is because it barks, and scares the heck out of you!

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X